I appreciate your podcast and normally enjoy your content very much. However, I felt uncomfortable with this episode, particularly the suggestion about teaching young lesbians how to orgasm in educational settings.
As someone who leads an organization focused on child safeguarding in schools, I have serious concerns about the current trajectory of sexuality education. In Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland, we're seeing Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programs that go far beyond age-appropriate health education. These programs explicitly focus on sexual pleasure "from zero age and up" and introduce complex adult concepts to children.
The data we're seeing is deeply troubling:
Victoria reports 6 cases of child-on-child sexual abuse weekly
1 in 10 schools in Victoria are engaged in legal cases related to these issues
We're finding 150+ books in school libraries that would receive X-ratings if they were films
Parents are increasingly being excluded from knowing what their children are exposed to
A recent case involved 9-year-old whose parent, Narelle Fraser, faced the threat of her child's expulsion simply for raising concerns about inappropriate books in the school library.
While I absolutely support age-appropriate, respectful education about relationships and identity, what we're seeing goes far beyond this. Schools are bringing in external organizations that promote medical interventions to children as young as 11, and teachers are actively encouraging children to view their parents as obstacles to their "sexual rights."
My concern with the suggestion in your episode is that it aligns too closely with this problematic CSE framework. When we normalize teaching sexual techniques in educational settings, we risk opening doors for those who would exploit these policies to harm children.
I believe we can support LGBTQ+ youth without sexualizing educational environments. The focus should be on safety, respect, and age-appropriate information - not on teaching sexual pleasure techniques.
I'd encourage looking into the origins of these curricula (including the Kinsey Institute's role in developing UNESCO guidelines) and the real-world impacts we're seeing in schools. This isn't about opposing LGBTQ+ inclusion - it's about protecting all children from inappropriate sexualization in educational settings.
(BTW / FYI we cover a lot on this topic on our Substack - it upsets me that LGBQTIA is an excuse for sexualising the school environment)
Kat, your comments are music to my ears!!! I also work in child safeguarding policy and research. I totally agree with you about sex & relationships education. I get called a homophobe for arguing that violating children’s human rights is NOT some kind of necessary collateral damage, some kind of sacrifice we must make for LGBTQIA “rights”. I’m not a homophobe I’m lesbian!
I personally think the ubiquity and normalisation of porn; kids’ decreasing age of first exposure; and the impacts of porn youth culture and social media all have a greater impact on the rising rates of boys sexually abusing girls, compared with the impacts of inappropriate, unethical sex ed.
However, I also think it’s irrefutable that some of these dodgy sex ed curricula seek to de-stigmatise and normalise a range of sexually deviant and abusive practices (including telling kids it’s good to watch porn!). At other times the information might be fine for older youths or adults, but is inappropriate and harmful for children and young adolescents.
The literature on child sexual abuse and exploitation is clear: premature exposure to information about sex —especially if it contains tacit endorsement of harmful sexual practices like sexual strangulation, kink, or porn for example — has developmental and psychosexual consequences.
And offenders know this!!! It’s part of why perpetrators of organised abuse and exploitation will force child victims to watch porn. Offenders know that age-inappropriate information or exposure to sex makes a child easier to groom for sexual abuse. (And easier for the offender to evade detection and prosecution).
Offenders are skilled at identifying and targeting kids who know more about sex than their age peers. Inappropriate exposure to information about sex disturbs the healthy development of kids’ neurophysiological “sexual maps” or scripts, which can increase the incidence of boys sexually victimising girls.
If you're involved in child safeguarding policy or research, would you be willing to look at a child safety kit I've prepared for schools, communities, and similar settings? It's designed to help establish behavioural standards to prevent child abuse.
Very few people seem to be paying attention to what's actually happening in schools—and sadly, that’s not surprising. Secrecy has become the norm.
I felt compelled to create this kit after visiting multiple schools alongside distressed parents, and after reviewing ACNC’s (Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission) Standard 6—the requirement for charities to address child safety. It was clear to me that what exists isn’t nearly enough.
There are no proper behavioural standards in many schools – just “temperature charts” about feelings or vague discussions about ‘problematic behaviour”. But nothing that identifies red flags or clearly forbids harmful actions.
I’ve seen this firsthand. A little boy with a medical stint in his head was bullied so badly – beaten fortnightly – the last incident put him in hospital. He was one blow away from death. The bullies faced no consequence.
I’ve seen the same failure when it comes to sexual abuse.
- Boys pulling down girl’s pants to touch them.
- Boys selling girls for sex, or girls selling themselves in gender-neutral toilets – for $5.
- Girls being filmed during assaults for Only Fans, images used for AI generated porn..
Schools don’t act to protect these children. Instead, they silence reports and punish parents who speak out. One parent told me, her little 8 year old girl was told by a boy: ‘if she told anyone, what he did, he’d take a pointed stick and ‘ram it up her until she bled.’
I’ve raised this with authorities. ACNC’s Standard 6 is useless – it only kicks in after abuse has occurred. Its a PR measure for a charity, not a prevention strategy. I sent them a briefing paper proposing clear, enforceable behavioural standards instead. Their response? “We’ll look at it.” That’s not good enough. Now I have to get an MP involved just to make sure something as basic as protecting children is taken seriously.
Meanwhile, sexual abuse in schools is exploding—and why wouldn’t it be? A decade ago, the government pushed the “Safe Schools” program, co-authored by two pedophile apologists and a Marxist lesbian who openly said the goal was to make kids Marxist and gay.
There’s been no due diligence. No safeguarding. Just ideological programs that have opened the door to real harm.
And seriously - there is so much worse than this happening in schools.
I completely agree with everything you've said here. I wonder though, since the guest responded first, if the conversation went in a different direction than it might have otherwise? I think most people who send in a dilezza just want Kathleen and Julie's take! When I heard the dilezza read out, I expected the conversation to focus on the "relationships" part of RSE, rather than the "sex" part, but the interviewee went in the complete opposite direction. In the interest of fairness to K&J, I think it would have been a very different conversation if it had been just the two of them. Thank you for all of the links, I really appreciate the awareness you're raising about the harms of this new CSE programme and will check it out.
Fantastic interview, what a wonderfully interest women Yehudis is. She made a terrific guest. More guests would be most welcome if they are of her calibre.
I found it incredibly educational - and cheering - to hear from someone who, despite all the harsh challenges experienced within their community, is still determined to hold onto the good in that community and fight for their right to be in it. When someone who can express their opinions so vividly and reasonably has decided against 'escape', it invites a more open-minded scrutiny of the group they've chosen to remain part of... A truly non-binary perspective, but in the best sense! Thanks for another excellent episode. PS - where can I try some gefilte fish??
What an amazing show, I love Yehudis spirit and probably walked by her many times. Feeling enlightened. Amazing woman, an inspiration. She needs to check out queer theory, it’s not okay.
A good friend of mine was raised as a Jehovah's Witness. She escaped due to 'disfellowship' (removal from the congregation) and is a lesbian. We watched the film 'Apostasy' together. It haunted me for weeks. My friend was fine - just glad she was shunned and thus able to be herself and forge her own life. As a child protection lawyer, I am appalled at the casual manner in which religious groups are allowed to police themselves, generally to the benefit of the perpetrators. The victims are, all too often, hidden in the name of preserving a veneer of respectability. As far removed from the teachings of Christ as it is possible to travel.
Excellent episode, wonderful guest. But...sweet gefilte fish, no. Give it to me salty and peppery. (Maybe this is my one-quarter Polish Ashkenazi side coming out.) But boiled, of course! Can't wait to read Chutzpah.
Re the intro part - Yehudis said she wasn’t feeling great because she’d dreamed that she hadn’t slept well. Maybe she was somehow tuning in to Julie prior to the pod, who actually hadn’t slept well?
I appreciate your podcast and normally enjoy your content very much. However, I felt uncomfortable with this episode, particularly the suggestion about teaching young lesbians how to orgasm in educational settings.
As someone who leads an organization focused on child safeguarding in schools, I have serious concerns about the current trajectory of sexuality education. In Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland, we're seeing Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programs that go far beyond age-appropriate health education. These programs explicitly focus on sexual pleasure "from zero age and up" and introduce complex adult concepts to children.
The data we're seeing is deeply troubling:
Victoria reports 6 cases of child-on-child sexual abuse weekly
1 in 10 schools in Victoria are engaged in legal cases related to these issues
We're finding 150+ books in school libraries that would receive X-ratings if they were films
Parents are increasingly being excluded from knowing what their children are exposed to
A recent case involved 9-year-old whose parent, Narelle Fraser, faced the threat of her child's expulsion simply for raising concerns about inappropriate books in the school library.
While I absolutely support age-appropriate, respectful education about relationships and identity, what we're seeing goes far beyond this. Schools are bringing in external organizations that promote medical interventions to children as young as 11, and teachers are actively encouraging children to view their parents as obstacles to their "sexual rights."
My concern with the suggestion in your episode is that it aligns too closely with this problematic CSE framework. When we normalize teaching sexual techniques in educational settings, we risk opening doors for those who would exploit these policies to harm children.
I believe we can support LGBTQ+ youth without sexualizing educational environments. The focus should be on safety, respect, and age-appropriate information - not on teaching sexual pleasure techniques.
I'd encourage looking into the origins of these curricula (including the Kinsey Institute's role in developing UNESCO guidelines) and the real-world impacts we're seeing in schools. This isn't about opposing LGBTQ+ inclusion - it's about protecting all children from inappropriate sexualization in educational settings.
(BTW / FYI we cover a lot on this topic on our Substack - it upsets me that LGBQTIA is an excuse for sexualising the school environment)
https://indefenseofchildren.substack.com/p/parent-facing-expulsion-threat-for
https://indefenseofchildren.substack.com/p/secrecy-maintains-child-on-child
https://indefenseofchildren.substack.com/p/making-cash-off-school-kids-part
https://indefenseofchildren.substack.com/p/queer-theory-what-every-parent-needs)
Kat, your comments are music to my ears!!! I also work in child safeguarding policy and research. I totally agree with you about sex & relationships education. I get called a homophobe for arguing that violating children’s human rights is NOT some kind of necessary collateral damage, some kind of sacrifice we must make for LGBTQIA “rights”. I’m not a homophobe I’m lesbian!
I personally think the ubiquity and normalisation of porn; kids’ decreasing age of first exposure; and the impacts of porn youth culture and social media all have a greater impact on the rising rates of boys sexually abusing girls, compared with the impacts of inappropriate, unethical sex ed.
However, I also think it’s irrefutable that some of these dodgy sex ed curricula seek to de-stigmatise and normalise a range of sexually deviant and abusive practices (including telling kids it’s good to watch porn!). At other times the information might be fine for older youths or adults, but is inappropriate and harmful for children and young adolescents.
The literature on child sexual abuse and exploitation is clear: premature exposure to information about sex —especially if it contains tacit endorsement of harmful sexual practices like sexual strangulation, kink, or porn for example — has developmental and psychosexual consequences.
And offenders know this!!! It’s part of why perpetrators of organised abuse and exploitation will force child victims to watch porn. Offenders know that age-inappropriate information or exposure to sex makes a child easier to groom for sexual abuse. (And easier for the offender to evade detection and prosecution).
Offenders are skilled at identifying and targeting kids who know more about sex than their age peers. Inappropriate exposure to information about sex disturbs the healthy development of kids’ neurophysiological “sexual maps” or scripts, which can increase the incidence of boys sexually victimising girls.
If you're involved in child safeguarding policy or research, would you be willing to look at a child safety kit I've prepared for schools, communities, and similar settings? It's designed to help establish behavioural standards to prevent child abuse.
Very few people seem to be paying attention to what's actually happening in schools—and sadly, that’s not surprising. Secrecy has become the norm.
I felt compelled to create this kit after visiting multiple schools alongside distressed parents, and after reviewing ACNC’s (Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission) Standard 6—the requirement for charities to address child safety. It was clear to me that what exists isn’t nearly enough.
There are no proper behavioural standards in many schools – just “temperature charts” about feelings or vague discussions about ‘problematic behaviour”. But nothing that identifies red flags or clearly forbids harmful actions.
I’ve seen this firsthand. A little boy with a medical stint in his head was bullied so badly – beaten fortnightly – the last incident put him in hospital. He was one blow away from death. The bullies faced no consequence.
I’ve seen the same failure when it comes to sexual abuse.
- Boys pulling down girl’s pants to touch them.
- Boys selling girls for sex, or girls selling themselves in gender-neutral toilets – for $5.
- Girls being filmed during assaults for Only Fans, images used for AI generated porn..
Schools don’t act to protect these children. Instead, they silence reports and punish parents who speak out. One parent told me, her little 8 year old girl was told by a boy: ‘if she told anyone, what he did, he’d take a pointed stick and ‘ram it up her until she bled.’
I’ve raised this with authorities. ACNC’s Standard 6 is useless – it only kicks in after abuse has occurred. Its a PR measure for a charity, not a prevention strategy. I sent them a briefing paper proposing clear, enforceable behavioural standards instead. Their response? “We’ll look at it.” That’s not good enough. Now I have to get an MP involved just to make sure something as basic as protecting children is taken seriously.
Meanwhile, sexual abuse in schools is exploding—and why wouldn’t it be? A decade ago, the government pushed the “Safe Schools” program, co-authored by two pedophile apologists and a Marxist lesbian who openly said the goal was to make kids Marxist and gay.
There’s been no due diligence. No safeguarding. Just ideological programs that have opened the door to real harm.
And seriously - there is so much worse than this happening in schools.
Sorry - I'm getting stuff off my chest :(
I completely agree with everything you've said here. I wonder though, since the guest responded first, if the conversation went in a different direction than it might have otherwise? I think most people who send in a dilezza just want Kathleen and Julie's take! When I heard the dilezza read out, I expected the conversation to focus on the "relationships" part of RSE, rather than the "sex" part, but the interviewee went in the complete opposite direction. In the interest of fairness to K&J, I think it would have been a very different conversation if it had been just the two of them. Thank you for all of the links, I really appreciate the awareness you're raising about the harms of this new CSE programme and will check it out.
Loved this episode! Yehudis was a fascinating guest. Thought provoking and insightful. Thanks all.
Fantastic interview, what a wonderfully interest women Yehudis is. She made a terrific guest. More guests would be most welcome if they are of her calibre.
I found it incredibly educational - and cheering - to hear from someone who, despite all the harsh challenges experienced within their community, is still determined to hold onto the good in that community and fight for their right to be in it. When someone who can express their opinions so vividly and reasonably has decided against 'escape', it invites a more open-minded scrutiny of the group they've chosen to remain part of... A truly non-binary perspective, but in the best sense! Thanks for another excellent episode. PS - where can I try some gefilte fish??
What a brilliant guest, thank you all, lots to think about there!
What an amazing show, I love Yehudis spirit and probably walked by her many times. Feeling enlightened. Amazing woman, an inspiration. She needs to check out queer theory, it’s not okay.
0:42 good mornings
2:21 the interview begins
41:24 queering research methods
46:33 dilezza
Such an interesting interview which could have gone on for hours there were so many avenues to explore.
Keep at it 👏
A good friend of mine was raised as a Jehovah's Witness. She escaped due to 'disfellowship' (removal from the congregation) and is a lesbian. We watched the film 'Apostasy' together. It haunted me for weeks. My friend was fine - just glad she was shunned and thus able to be herself and forge her own life. As a child protection lawyer, I am appalled at the casual manner in which religious groups are allowed to police themselves, generally to the benefit of the perpetrators. The victims are, all too often, hidden in the name of preserving a veneer of respectability. As far removed from the teachings of Christ as it is possible to travel.
Totally agree with Kathleen on the school thing re orgasm.
Excellent episode, wonderful guest. But...sweet gefilte fish, no. Give it to me salty and peppery. (Maybe this is my one-quarter Polish Ashkenazi side coming out.) But boiled, of course! Can't wait to read Chutzpah.
Re the intro part - Yehudis said she wasn’t feeling great because she’d dreamed that she hadn’t slept well. Maybe she was somehow tuning in to Julie prior to the pod, who actually hadn’t slept well?